Previous Post
Next Post

I would hate to see a day when Americans decided to take up arms against their own government. It seems preposterous. If not that, ill-advised. If not that, really really scary. But I sense a sea change in both the government’s actions on guns and gun owners’ reactions to those actions.  For example (as we predicted) gun owners are ignoring/disobeying the post-Newtown gun registration laws in New York and Connecticut. This is creating a negative feedback loop. Threats to gun owners (e.g., the warning letters sent by the NYPD to Big Apple gun owners) followed by anger by gun owners followed by . . . raids on gun owners’ houses/apartments to confiscate illegal firearms. Followed by . . . ? Of course it’s not all about guns. Not yet. Hopefully never. Your thoughts?

Previous Post
Next Post


    • We will not finish it, unless the United States Military decides not to attack on the soil or the citizens of the United States. No matter how much firepower The People have…nothing can beat the bombers or the A-10s on a massive scale. I would rather see a peaceful split of the country…then the Civil War II.

      • nothing can beat the bombers or the A-10s on a massive scale

        Brilliant! Please tell the Taliban. They haven’t gotten the memo.

        • And a lot of them die young – in a country that will never have a chance to progress out of the Stone Age. This is not a fate I would wish on our nation.

        • Yes, this. There is a world of difference between going over and kicking the hell out of a country on the one hand and subjugating and ruling it on the other. The latter has certainly been done throughout history, but it’s always a very dicey proposition when the people are armed.

        • Gun owners ain’t the Taliban. Sorry, but until you’ve been fighting insurgency warfare for decade, that comparison is silly.

        • The Taliban will have kicked out two super-powers.

          This whole notion of “we would never win against the big bad US Military and their bombers” is pure bullish!t, I would rather die trying and take a few b@stards with me than live under a dictator.

          “We would never win against XYZ”. Tell that to every single successful uprising throughout history fighting for their beliefs.

        • @Hannibal. You’re absolutely right, we aren’t the Taliban which is why we don’t cut the heads off of those that disagree with us and wipe our @sses with our hand.

          FVCK you man.

        • There are things about the Taliban that would not apply to Americans who would be fighting our military on US soil. (1) Taliban have logistical and financial support from nearby countries, we would not. (2) Taliban are religious fanatics who think dying is a good thing, we do not. (3) Taliban are willing to take severe casualties, ten -to-one or more, we would not. In 1776, the weapons, as far as capability, were pretty much even for both sides. Today the civilians have very advanced firepower, but the military firepower has grown exponentially. There would be no hiding in the woods/mountains…you can’t fight a drone. It would not be long before the military knew where your hiding place was located, how many fighters you had there, and what you were eating for breakfast.

          In other words, our only hope is that the military people will obey their oath to defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and refuse to fire on American citizens. And, I think they would refuse to do that. The people I know in the military, and veterans, would indeed refuse to do that. And that is a good thing, because despite the fantasy, you will not beat our mililtary if you choose to fight them. Don’t confuse politics with firepower.

        • Why do I always see the assumption of “conventional warfare” in these “Resistance is futile” against a modern army comments?
          Recent history gives the lie to such assumptions. The massive battles of WWII are as obsolete as the marching of men onto the battlefield to the music of fife and drum, to fire volleys of musketry on command against the massed ranks of the enemy.

        • I definitely agree, Ralph!

          A10’s are useless against an armed country where there is no clear place to drop a bomb, no clear knowledge that their might be spies around the A10’s, and no clear location of withdrawal since the enemy surrounds you everywhere.

          I see again and again people chiming in with “we are nothing against nukes” and “the gov has spy planes and jets and bombers.” It’s just ridiculous. If the gov used nukes (typically people don’t sh!t where they eat) or jets, bombs, etc. They would only ensure the decision of hundreds of millions of people sitting on the side lines undecided, to join in.

        • Patriot says:
          December 7, 2013 at 20:02
          @Hannibal. You’re absolutely right, we aren’t the Taliban which is why we don’t cut the heads off of those that disagree with us and wipe our @sses with our hand. FVCK you man.

          You’re right, you don’t do those things, you just play Billy Badass behind a computer screen… probably jackin’ it in a digital camo sock to the best parts of Red Dawn. The same nature of someone that allows them to cut someone’s head off and wipe with their hands is the nature that allows them to fight insurgency campaigns and never give up. You’d probably surrender when you ran out of Charmin.

          • “we aren’t the Taliban which is why we don’t cut the heads off of those that disagree with us and wipe our @sses with our hand. FVCK you man.”

            No, we don’t. We get a pimply-faced boy at a game console to drone-kill their wedding party.

      • Many people during the American Revolution said the same thing about a rag-tag bunch of farmers standing up to the largest, best trained and best funded military on the planet. How did that turn out?

        If you need other examples of armed revolts over throwing established, well funded governments check out Castro in Cuba, Lenin in Czarist Russia and Mao in China.

        “Every battle is won before it’s ever fought.”
        ― Sun Tzu

        • Just to point out.

          We were losing the revolution until the French lent support, and king George was already fighting a war. The tax increases that helped lead to the revolution were supposed to help pay for that war. “We” didn’t feel it was our duty to pay for a war the colonies weren’t involved in. The crown however felt that because we were subjects it was.

          Your point stands though. If enough of the population were to revolt they could win. Just depends of the factors in play and the numbers at work.

        • To be fair, the French didn’t lend their support until we started winning battles. It wasn’t that there were no victories until we had French support.

          I like your other points, though.

      • I love the A-10. I do. And I love the AH-64, and the Abrams, and I even still like the Bradleys, at least in their auxiliary role. But the infrastructure that’s required to keep those things running is absolutely dependant on the good old civilian population. And the minute those guns turn on that civilian population, the pumps turn off, the wrenches stop turning, and the mighty armed forces are left with the guns in their hands and food in their packs.
        And they know it, too.

        • This a thousand times. I’ve heard the US military argument from every anti I’ve ever talked with.

          They usually have no idea how much civilian logistics are needed to feed that enormous machine.

          Our military has never had to fight a large scale war without the logistical support of the citizens of the united states. It’s not clear that they could.

          Besides, the guys I know, that are serving, have said they would flat-out disobey any orders to engage US civilians….especially if that order came from our current dear leader.

        • This right here. They wont last a week without support from many sectors. H3ll the media provides support for our enemies now. Imagine the scenes of US Army attacks on civilians in suburbia.

        • The idea of armed warfare with our own government is repellant. However, I reject the “citizens with rifles could never stand up to tanks and bombs” argument. A few points.

          1. How many soldiers would actually fire on their fellow citizens?

          2. How many soldiers would become 5th columnists? Sabotage could be a tremendous asset.

          3. Think of how restrictive the Rules of Engagement would have to be. Every innocent American killed as “collateral damage” from a bomb or A-10 attack would fuel the revolution.

          4. The Taliban can’t get at the military’s logistic infrastructure over here in America. Hypothetical American revolutionaries could.

          5. Soft targets abound. You don’t have to just take out military targets. Attack government agencies. Blow up the computers that process Social Security checks or Food Stamp cards. Create societal chaos that the government would have to spend time and resources putting down.

          6. Think of all the fun our enemies overseas would have with a US Govt. tied up in a civil war. Trouble would break out all over the globe, again distracting the government from the war at home.

          It’s terrible to contemplate, but it would be done.

        • I fly AH-64s… Any rotary or fixed wing aircraft is a logistical nightmare… Moreover, I wouldn’t fight the American people, and would either lead a local militia or steal an apache for militia use, at least as long as it worked without maintenance… That being said, the idea ,of the American military turning on its own people is sickening and in my experience unrealistic… The educated people in the military would most likely not comply… I would be the first to resign my commission.

      • Could the american people theoretically beat a modern military with all of their tanks and planes etc? I don’t know. I think it would come down to being more of an issue of mutually assured destruction. Freedom loving americans may lose many, but I think the power elite would lose a great number as well. In addition, how many in the military are willing to fire on american people? I don’t know the answer to that either, but I do know it would not be all of them. I wouldn’t put it past many in law enforcement, but I still think most in the military think they are there to fight for american liberty and the constitution. I do know that politicians do not like an armed populace because it scares them. I think deep down they are afraid that their totalitarian agenda is going to push someone over the edge, and they are afraid of what might happen if that individual has a gun. I’m not saying a violent repercussion is a good thing, but the fact that they fear it is.

        • Don’t think for a second that somewhere globalist banksters aren’t salivating over the prospect of propagating a civil war here in the US. The dwindling populations of self-reliant, resourceful, armed communities spanning rural America are the last barriers to an agenda of implementing global governance. Takeover through slow incremental methods of political corruption and social engineering has taken generations. They would surely prefer a hot war now that the sleeping giant is slowly awakening from our cumulative slumber.

          Without the Armed Forces and domestic Law Enforcement, they are powerless to bring such a conflict to fruition. Instead of deepening the chasm between the civilian population and LEO and Military with rhetoric about “them vs us”; why not reach out to your fellow Americans and help them understand that our government has been genuinely hijacked. Aren’t they Americans also? Don’t they have to raise their families in the same communities we do?

          Talk is cheap, action is everything. Please join or support your local chapter of the Oath Keepers.
          Visit Oath Keepers. org

        • Trey, that’s absurd. With a civil war would come the explosive decompression of the dollar (along with the US economy), so their assets would vanish within an hour. And as for the ridiculous notion that they have gold, well, they can try to eat that…

        • To Jus Bill The Implosion of the Dollar is inevitable. We probably have unit 2017 (hopefully). I agree with Evan, would LEO or Homeland Security fire on Americans, remember they supposedly bought 1.5 billion rounds of ammo. What’s that for, do they know/foresee something we in the general populace are unaware of.
          If we use 1913, (the year the Federal Reserve & the IRS was created btw) as when the dollar was a dollar was valued as a dollar, today our dollar is worth $0.04 cents.

      • Clearly, you don’t fully understand the dynamics or dimensions of what 4th Generation Warfare would be like in the American context. What makes you think that all of those Warthog drivers will automatically be on the government’s side?

        • Indeed. And the pilots willing to fly missions against fellow Americans, what would they strike? Massed insurgents? There won’t be any massed insurgents – at least more than once. The isolated farmhouse? Perhaps, but that too won’t work but for a limited time. And what would happen should the government drive people off farms? The government has virtually no defense against a smart insurgency.

      • “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

        – United States Declaration of Independence, July 4 1776

        If you ask me, those forefather guys had it right all along. Yes, Americans seem to be willing to put up rather than stand up, but make no mistake, they will stand up when they feel the need.

        IMHO, any “revolution” that might happen probably will be overcome by anarchy – people that see the opportunity to do bad things simply because they can. Patriots will be caught in the middle, on the one hand fighting off organized federal forces, and on the other, fighting off outright criminals and thugs. The federal government won’t try to rein in the criminal element because they will be working toward the same end – disrupting the revolutionaries.

      • You don’t have a beat bombers and A-10’s, you just have to shoot the pilots, or their families.

        That’s the interesting part about civil conflicts, it’s not country on country, it’s neighbor on neighbor.

        • This. The most likely scenarios for an insurgency don’t have much if anything for conventional military forces to do. And Edward Snowdon’s revelations should dissuade anyone from doing anything in a group outside of a *highly* trusted circle (e.g., militias), or involving the Internet, or with a cell phone riding along.

          Should an insurgency occur, it will mostly likely be made up of individuals who feel wronged by a particular agency or individual(s), who takes individual action. If there are no witnesses and you don’t tell anyone, how can you get caught? Combine this with guerrilla actions like hacking and releasing the names and home addresses of say a group of government workers who have engaged in egregious activities and wronged individuals will have a suddenly target rich environment. And the government will have no real enemy on which to focus their force.

          I think government will have a real incentive to play down an insurgency as soldiers patrolling streets in Bradleys is proof positive of oppression and the fear government has of their own citizens. Such an outcome would just as likely accelerate an insurgency as tamp it down.

      • You are forgetting how many service members would be unwilling to participate in military action against US citizens and would instead defect.

      • I think it’s more a matter of letting them know that a certain price will be paid if they push us too far, and do they really want to pay that price? The civilian population is heavily armed and sitting on plies of ammo. If a couple of semi- high officials met an unfortunate end, then might think again about going too far over the line.

        This is NOT a threat, btw. I’m just laying out what the capabilities are. The civilian population is full of hunters, vets, and hobbyists into long range shooting. IEDs are easy to build by a technologically advanced culture. Again, I am not making a threat, but it’s good that we have some capability, for all the reasons the Founders laid out. The constant push for gun control is not about lowering crime. It’s about controlling the populace.

        • Yea but how do we all come together and decide where our “red line” is? I think they’ve definitely crossed it in NY and CA.

      • As long as you know where the families of the people flying those planes live it is pretty easy to discourage them from pressing the red button.

        Civil war is a terrible, terrible thing.

        • Do you wish to be the first one to murder women and children? The families of those pilots? Not only is it murder, but it’s a green light for the other side to behave in the same way. Be carefull of what you wish for. It has a terrible way of happening.

        • And that is the nature of civil war.

          I suppose that you have read the news about this exact thing happening all over the world…since basically the beginning of mankind.

      • The fundamental flaw in the “nothing can beat bombers and fighter jets and tanks” argument is twofold:

        1) Most of the US Military will not turn against the People. As a conservative estimate, I would say that half of the military is from gun owning families. Are they going to turn their guns against their own family, friends, and townspeople? Some will; most won’t. They have to lay their heads somewhere at night.

        2) That argument is based on the assumption that those engaging in the battles would face the military forces head-on. Nobody is stupid enough to march down the street against a tank, just like nobody was stupid enough to march down the street against the redcoats during the Revolution.

        Those who’re fighting are going to utilize guerilla tactics. How does that work with the bombers and fighter jets? Do they just fly around, dropping bombs and hoping they hit someone? Do the fighter jets fly around until they find someone and let fly the missiles? No. That’s a total waste of money and resources on their part.

        Combat aircraft are only useful when they have an identified/identifiable target. They are not patrol vehicles; FAR too costly.

        Plus, skeptics scoff at the idea of people fighting against an organized military force today (I avoid saying “fight against the US Military” because, as I already demonstrated, there would be no US Military to fight) just as skeptics scoffed at the idea of a bunch of farmers going to war against the biggest, best trained army in the world before the Revolution started over two hundred years ago. Look how that one turned out.

        There was an interesting analysis done on the topic awhile back I read. Can’t remember where, but here’s the gist of it…

        Our entire military is about 3.25 million members, give or take. And they estimate there’s approximately 100 million legal gun owners in the US. If you assume the military had 100% participation (which would never happen) and only 10% of US gun owners participated (which would realistically probably be much more) then you’re looking at 10:3 odds. And as if that weren’t convincing enough, the minority would be bringing the fight to the People, who know the land better, and who’re fighting for their lives, rather than just following orders. Also, the vast majority of the minority will be on foot.

        After a couple of crippling losses, do you think the legions of thugs would be quite so gung-ho to fight? Probably not. After all, what the People are fighting for is worth their lives; the Government forces couldn’t say the same.

        • “And as if that weren’t convincing enough, the minority would be bringing the fight to the People, who know the land better, and who’re fighting for their lives, rather than just following orders.”
          This is the crux of the matter. The US military has NEVER, REPEAT, NEVER won a war against an indigenous population fighting for their homes on home turf since WWII. Read Sun Tsu, and learn.

        • I think that is over-simplifying it. We gave the enemy hell in Vietnam and never lost any major battle in that war. The only reason it was a Pyrrhic victory for us was because of Johnson’s giving orders and interfering with the generals and also the Soviets and the Chinese supplying the North Vietnamese.

        • @Kyle

          Vietnam was not a Pyrrhic – nor any other kind of – victory for the US. The US lost; I don’t know why so many people can’t admit that.

        • Why does everyone keep thinking the government would pit the military against the populace? As we see today, the politicians are gutting the military and MILITARIZING POLICE. How many good honest cops in NY are imprisoning ordinary people simply for having an unregistered rifle or standard capacity magazine? and these police think they’re doing the right thing for “taking illegal guns off the street.” You’re wasting your breath if you’re talking about the military turning on the people.

          The long and short of it, we’re a long way from revolution and local elections are much more important than you think.

        • Kyle says: “Pyrrhic victory …”

          Uh, Kyle, I was in Southeast Asia when the US Military got booted out of Vietnam in abject humiliation. It might have been “Pyrrhic,” whatever that means, but by no stretch of the imagination was it anywhere near a “victory.” Tricky Dick Nixon resigned in disgrace because of it.

          Of course, it never should have been fought in the first place. There hasn’t been a “legitimate” war since WWII, and we were reluctant to get involved in that until Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and Adolph declared war formally.

          Since then, the various crusades perpetrated half-way around the world have been nothing but self-aggrandizement and accumulation of power by the ruling elite.

        • JusBill. the sad thing is that the American military, those that choose to support the other side will be fighting on their home soil also. If they lose, what’s their options?

        • To Rich….

          There hasn’t been a “legitimate” war since WW2

          Oh BS, it’s quite easy to make an argument that EVERY substantial military engagement since WW2 was a morally correct decision.

          First one after WW2 being the easiest…

          Please enlighten us on how our actions during the Korean war which has kept 50 million South Koreans from being forced into 60 years of a hellish death camp is not “legitimate”. You’re really a fool some times.

          • Yep; we should wage war on every nation on Earth, including ourselves. Oh, wait – we DO wage war on our own countrymen!

            America: brutal policeman of the world.

          • (Rich Grise:) There hasn’t been a “legitimate” war since WWII

            “Oh BS, it’s quite easy to make an argument that EVERY substantial military engagement since WW2 was a morally correct decision.”

            Then I’m sure you’ll have no problem looking up the Congressional Declaration of War for each of them to show me a link to, will you?

            More harm, more bloodshed has been caused in the name of “morally correct decision[s]” than any other single cause, followed closely by “your own good” and “your protection.”

            Fie on that crap.

      • It kind of seems like people are under the notion that all military members are mindless machines who blindly follow orders. This type of situation gets discussed to great length across all ranks on many occasions – needless to say our oath is to support and defend the constitution,and to follow lawful orders from those appointed over us.

      • Never forget that the French helped fund and supply our first revolution. We are not an island, and unfortunately there are players other than our own military that would get involved. Allies, the UN, and contractor operator types would be involved even if our military refused to be. Further, enemies of the US would have a much easier time deploying on our soil for their own benefit if fighting broke out amongst us. We would already be divided and would crumble if a country like China decided to take advantage of our civil unrest. A revolution in the US could very likely turn into the epicenter for WWIII.

        As for the supply chain issues, I wouldn’t be so sure that our military would be stopped cold. They can get oil and munitions from lots of places that aren’t inside the US, and from lots of companies that aren’t based here or dependent on us. Since so many of our military vehicles and weapons are used internationally, parts supply and replacements wouldn’t be tough to arrange, either. Also, what’s to stop them turning off the commercial pumps and diverting all resources to fighting ‘domestic terrorists?’

        It would be a hell of a lot tougher to fight our government than the Walter Mittys among us realize, but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t (or shouldn’t, in the right circumstances) be done.

      • They need people to maintain them, they need people to operate them, they need people to fuel them; I’d like to believe that a majority of Americans, whether military or not, would NOT support a large-scale military assault on American citizens.

        And don’t forget the Oath Keepers, the CSPOA, Nullification, and lots of other Liberty-minded people who believe in Constitutional government. The PTB are chipping away at the edges, getting a lot of press going after “low-hanging fruit,” but if push ever came to shove, I’m betting my life that Liberty will win.

      • Another complicating factor will be the current welfare-dependents rioting in the streets when their largess dries up.

        • Yes. I’ve often thought the welfare set would be an ideal pool of candidates for enlistment by the government when SHTF (don’t laugh- it worked for TSA and DHS…). If some of those people could get a decent salary, some riot gear, and a gun to crack down on the ‘domestic terror threat’ (read- middle-class gun owners), we’d have another formidable opponent on our shores, standing on street corners looking for a fight.

          Here’s a question: How do illegal aliens fit into this equation? In my neck of the woods, they are here often as not to get jobs in manual labor. If that dries up because of domestic unrest, will they head back south, or do they band together to try to hold on? That’s a ~15 million person problem, potentially.
          Here’s another question: What will our neighbors do? Mexico may as well be in its own civil war at this point, but what about Canada? Will they close their border to us, or give refuge to asylum-seekers? Will they send their flannel-clad, maple-scented shock-troops to aide the Feds, or our citizens?
          It’s fun to scream ‘Molon Labe’ from a hilltop, but I worry a lot more people will respond than we anticipate.

        • Not just welfare dependents Rich. If America falls apart in a civil war what about your monthly social security payments? What about the values of people’s real estate? Bank accounts? Will a lifetime of work be swept away and leave a fragmented nation in poverty? Will families be seperated by Berlin Wall’s all across our country?

          A lot of miserable loner loser types preach for and hope for a civil war. I hope for sanity to prevail.

      • You seem to be under a misguided impression citizens can or do not get their hands on heavy ordnance. Perhaps you should look at the USSR vs. Afghan Rebels, US vs. Iraq/Afghanistan, Syria rebels vs. Syrian government.

        Do you think that once a servicemen/women leaves the service they forget how to use things?

      • And do you think the USA could withstand a protracted war with the demographic that makes the food? An army marches on its stomach and we’d see just how crazy the urbanites got once they realize who they were trying to subjugate all these years.

        • Exactly. How else could the Viet Cong have defeated the “undefeatable” might of the United States, the Pathans the “undefeatable” power of Britain and Russia, or the might of Britain in the American Revolution, and the War of 1812?

      • Say what you will about the military. But I know I joined to fight for my fellow Americans and to uphold the constitution. Not be a muscle for a dictator. We would split, our obligations would lie with our neighbors and family being suppressed by a domestic violence.

      • I don’t believe that the rank and file military will turn on the American people. They are as disgusted with their Commander in Chief as we are.

        And if you don’t think a guerrilla force can overcome our military might, then you have forgotten Viet Nam.

        • Point of order: Vietnam was a hybrid war, with conventional troops (PAVN aka NVA regulars) being the decisive factor in the war, not really the insurgency. In fact, early in the U.S. Vietnam War (aka 2d Indochina War) the PAVN was duking it out with U.S. and ARVN regular forces (“We Were Soldiers” tells this story, it was from 1965). The NV leadership decided to go big, including turning VC militia into conventional forces. It worked simply because “The Americans have the watches, we [NV gov’t] have the time.” The NV strategists banked on the American public growing war weary. Sound strategy, properly executed, with sufficient logistics, wins wars. NV strategy essentially forced the U.S. to expend treasure and blood in MASSIVE quantities against a wily conventional enemy with unconventional resources backing him up.

    • in the final word if it ever comes down to that kind of a shooting war?? we out number the police we outnumber the troops
      and we by god out number the morons in office,
      sometimes it is just not possible to fix a broken system
      you just start over and pray for the best. we have some how over the last 30 years allowed the pc and liberals to hijack our colleges and our institutions of learning, our children cant or wont think for themselves and once they get to college they get taught all about how bad america is rather then why we are the greatest country in the world and the best and most free in the world. perhaps it is time for the people of the gun to exercise our 2nd amendment right

    • My first response was to say, “Have you ever seen an unarmed revolution succeed?” Then I though of the long-term Progressive strategy and how they have nearly successfully taken over our government and wondered if I was correct in that assumption. Finally it occurred to me that the only reason the Progressives have been successful is that they have infiltrated the government by stealth and have at their disposal ALL of the weapons at the hands of that government and all of the implied use of arms that brings.

      And that leaves, to the best of my knowledge, only the Czech “Velvet Revolution” as a successful unarmed revolution.

      • Kitenge: “He is our leader, he seized power in a bloodless coup. All smothering!”
        Marge Simpson: “Just like Jimmy Carter!”

    • What I find just as disturbing, perhaps more so, is the
      number of people who continue to bury their heads
      in the sand and think ‘it’ll never happen here’.

      Considering the number of “ultra crazy conspiracy nuts”
      that have been completely vindicated, I’d caution anyone
      from being dismissive about the possibility of open
      resistance (armed or not).

    • Sadly, there are people out there, lots of them, who will live in denial of the fact taht armed revolution is the only kind that has ever worked. We lose Rights and Freedoms incrementally, but they are only ever taken back in bloody chunks. It’s ugly, but it’s true. If you won’t step up to it, then you’ve already decided to lose.

      • “taht armed revolution is the only kind that has ever worked.”

        Demonstrably false. I give you Gandhi’s India, and the soft revolution that toppled the Soviets’ hold on Eastern Europe. Quite recently, I might add.

        When you say things like that, people will regard you as feeble-minded.

        • All right you lured me in. The only reason Gandhi advocated peacefull resistance is because the British had confiscated all the guns.

          • This is true, of course, and he said as much. However, I was reacting to what you said, not to what you were thinking.

          • “The only reason Ghandi advocated peacefull resistance is because the British had confiscated all the guns.”

            Not ‘only.’ Remember, Peace is Better.

    • Not yet. But that’s the direction we’re sliding in. Thanks to our Constitution I can buy a rifle at the mall. Thanks to the current attempt at “re-interpreting the Constitution, if the wrong person sees me standing in my yard with that same rifle (or anything that looks like a rifle) , dozens of cops from several agencies will turn up in a tactical tidal wave, shoot my dog, ransack my house, and make my life hell. It happens to someone every day.
      And it’s not just guns. We have people in prison for weed. But Holder says it’s now okay. But we won’t repeal the law–we just won’t enforce it, except in certain cases, if we want to. Think Holder would look the other way if George Zimmerman got caught with a bag of pot?
      And the list goes on–government making up rules as they go along and no one held accountable.
      The big government bubble of arrogance will burst just like any other bubble. It’s just a matter of how and when.

  1. There’s more to be upset with than ever before. It will happen. The only question is when – maybe in 2 years, maybe in 200.

  2. The history of man is cyclic in nature. The American story for the most part has been an anomaly, in the sense that we have remained relatively at peace during the times we have exchanged governmental power from party to party or administration to administration. The notion that this Union of the States, or any political union for that matter will be, or ever can be eternal is absurd and preposterous.

    I believe the day of reckoning will come. It is like the sands of an hour glass slowing collecting at the bottom. Ever politician wants to “make their mark”, or pass some piece of legislation simply often to “do something”. What do these new laws usually deal with? The expansion or preservation of liberty? No. They often regulate something that was previously not regulated, tax something that was previously not taxed or ban something that was previously allowed. With each passing law, the pile of sand grows until the mountian of laws have essentially prohibited every activity a human being can participate in. At that moment, the society has no choice but to throw off the bonds that enslave it and start anew.

    I have 7000 years of human history on my side, and for anyone to assume we are different is fooling themselves.

    • Yes, it seems that true freedom is simply a point in an historical cycle as is totalitarianism, populism, complete anarchy, etc. If you look at the long view, as you point out, you can’t help but see that no society ever attains full freedom without then slowly loosing it, only to regain it, and go around the circle again.

      • “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage.”

        – Alexander Tyler

    • I still believe that America is something new under the sun, and not necessarily fated to mimic the history of the older nations, weighted as they are by millennia of royalty and tyranny. In our fight, I think there will be some martyrs, but liberty can be preserved without another civil war. Don’t give up, but fight SMART, for chrissakes.

      • I agree with your sentiment and do believe in the divine providence of this nation, however, we are the same human beings our ancestors were. We suffer from the same frailtiesand lusts for the same power and wealth. We are no different than them and as such, I feel are doomed to the same fate.

      • All empires fall. This one will too in the future. It is inevitable only the timeframe is questionable. Will the People recognize it when it happens?

        • When they see the tanks rolling down Main St, they’ll get the message.

          Nothing can save this country now. It isn’t IF it’ll come crashing down, but WHEN.

        • Sorry, no criticism of your belief. Life would be simpler if I shared it, I’m sure, but you’re talking to an atheist of long standing here. And that’s the last I’m going to say on the subject. There really is no common ground on the question of religion between a person of faith and a non-believer, I’ve found.

        • Leadbelly,

          “Don’t give up, but fight SMART, for chrissakes”

          An atheist that is wanting to fight smart for the sake of Christ, interesting concept my friend.

        • Coming from my mouth “for chrissakes” is nothing but a cuss word, something my old man said when he was pissed. Don’t try to read too much into it.

          • Seeing how Christ was treated the first time around, I have little hope of him being stupid enough to return – EVER.

        • If Christ wasn’t just another snake oil salesman, then when he rose from the dead he would have hung around and taught the rest of us how to do the trick, not shown us such a huge teaser then taken his miracle power and gone home.

          If there is a God who has any power, then why are things the way they are on Earth?

          • 1) He didn’t die; it was a magic trick.
            2) God doesn’t care. He’s indifferent to human suffering.
            3) Life is an exam; you failed.

  3. I cannot imagine a more horrible thing, yet I fear that it may be inevitable. The only recourse is to not only stop an ever encroaching Federal government, but to begin reversing the near-totalitarian grip the government has on us, the citizens.

    The problem is that stopping the overreach of government can only be done if the citizenry – and I mean almost all of us – begins embracing the concepts of personal responsibility and individual liberty. While there are many arms of government that force their way into our lives like a wedge, in many cases they simply fill a gap that already exists.

    Such gaps exist in terms of personal safety – someone needs a cop or a security company because they can’t or don’t want to be responsible for their own safety. Environmental regulation was created because corporations did a damn poor job of policing themselves (that’s not in all cases, but it is the genesis of it). Similarly with financial regulation; the greedy, dishonest, and outright evil (Bernie Madoff, anyone) opened the door to regulation because of their actions (again, not in all cases is this true).

    So many people want a nanny state to protect them, to tell them everything is going to be just fine, to fill their heads with thoughts of sugar plums (tis the season). They want or need ongoing parenting well into their adult life. We need a sea change in American culture and I think such a groundswell could delay and even reverse that inevitable slide into a not-so-civil war.

    But it is cold and glum today, so maybe that is just what is affecting my mood. Residents of New Mexico sort of freak out when we cannot see the sun.

  4. I just don’t see it happening. Ever. Sure people talk like big shots, but when push comes to shove and they have to decide if they are really willing to give up their relatively comfy lifestyles for the harsh reality of violent revolution in their own backyard, most will back down from those big words. Take a look at what happened in the days after Hurricane Katrina in NO. Sure there will be a few people here and there that will fight, but you can bet that most of them will be dealt with quickly in order to quell any growing movement toward mass insurrection.

    I hope it never comes to that, but if it does, that’s how I see it going down.

    • It will not take a lot of people to get this kinda dance started, just a few true believers, but once the music starts playing people will be forced to pick sides.

      Revolutions like one that would occur in an already divided country like our will start feeding itself and become self-sustaining quickly possible as soon as one side feels the need for revenge. We might be one bloody gun raid away from the end of our nation as we know it.

      • If you can’t win enough votes to win an election, how in the world do you hope to win a revolution? A few “true believers” in the minority who take up arms and begin attacking the democratically elected government aren’t going to win over the folks who voted in that government.

        • It is minorities of the population that win revolutions. The American revolution was no different.

        • Wars are not won by popular consensus but by deeds of arms. History is replete with examples of victorious minorities controlling a much larger state. The only thing that these “victorious minorities” all seems to have in common is that they were armed. Besides any civil war fought would not be to conquer The United States. No the next civil war will be fought to break part of it off so that the people that live there can live as they want.

          We are a people that has grown apart. There are two Americas and they don’t like or care for the other.

      • I think, deep down, that people in this country have too much hope for that. Much like Europe had such hopes that Germany wouldn’t start WW2. Back then it was, “Well, if they just take Austria, it’s okay. It’s only Austria. Maybe they’ll stop there.” Rinse and repeat.

        Think about how you view this country and its founding principles. There is, at the core, a belief that the Constitution and the BoR are how it is supposed to be. It’s how humans should govern. It was a radical idea at the time and bold men, no matter what their personal faults, gave their blood and lives for that radical idea. I think many people here love this country (or at least love what it used to be). There is an ingrained hope in all of us that truth, informative voting and personal resposibility will win the day because that’s how it’s supposed to work. I fear that we, much like pre-WW2 Europe, will not realize the folly of that belief until it is too late. It’s that hope that will keep most people in their recliner watching their big screen instead of physically fighting for their rights.

        Unfortunately, statists are not constrained by the same hope or beliefs.

  5. I think an armed revolution would be fruitless because it would result in a power shift back to the east and possibly ignite WW3.

    • WW3 is a coming and it will be fought in the valley of Megiddo, I’ve read the book and know how it ends.

  6. Once, a few years back, I stood in front of my city counsel during the “comments” period for some new anti-rights rules they were considering, looked them in the face, and very calmly and without fanfare or drama read the following statement…

    “Gentlemen and Ladies of the City Council;
    I have been a trusted, law-abiding, resident and taxpayer for my entire life.
    I am considered to be a civic-minded member of the community and I have never, nor do I intend to ever, commit crimes or act against my fellow man.
    So I would respectfully ask this committee to tell me precisely what rationale leads you to consider turning me into a de-facto criminal with this proposed legislation. I would like this committee to explain explicitly what -I-, as an individual, have done to earn these restrictions and infringements, and if the answer is that it was not intended that -I-, me, specifically, and other residents JUST LIKE ME in this city should fall under the reach of the proposed rules then I submit that this is an example of poor legislation and the proposed rules must be rejected both in part and in whole.”

    You’d have thought I pulled out a grenade and pulled the pin by the reaction I got. To be honest, the way the counsel was acting I seriously thought I was going to get escorted out of the meeting at the very minimum. I simply could not believe how they reacted to a calm, deliberate, reading that called them out on the carpet and politely demanded an explanation for their actions.

    Fortunately the proposed rules were soundly voted down but after that I sat down with my lawyer and made backup legal plans for that day when some government official decides that I need to be discredited and/or hushed up.

    • Excellent statement. I would have loved to see the look on their faces as they were publicly called out for their misguided beliefs.

  7. “If the people come to believe that the gov’t is no long constained by the laws then they will conclude that neither are they.”

    Bingo, that says it all!

  8. Well… the second amendment is there so that if (when?) the federal government goes to far the people will have the means to… deal with it.

  9. “We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box.”

    I have confidence in first three because they rarely fail, but the Founders knew and understood that we needed the cartridge box too.

    As long as we have the latter, we can continue to rely on peaceful means. But si vis pacem, para bellum.

    • “What are you going to do against tanks and bombers?” is what I have heard antis say who assert that the 2A is obsolete. To them, in the same vein as your post, I would reply that a guarantee of armed citizens serves to maintain the respectful, horizontal relationship between authorities and citizens. People who want to disarm citizens want to take that relationship of mutual respect away.

      • Never forget that the Viet Cong shot down F111s with buckshot.

        For every measure there is a countermeasure.

      • They ask you that question because they have no respect for the soldiers that comprise our force of volunteers and think that everyone who has a gun is a stupid mindless idiot. They also think that everyone who doesn’t share their opinions are stupid and mindless. Gotta love liberals for what they are: megalomaniacs.

        • And yet so many here look down upon liberals, regularly call them stupid, and call them other names as if liberal people didn’t also have families, firearms, and military histories. That kind of thinking would clearly come back to haunt people that think that everyone thinks like them.

  10. I’m looking at getting involved with my local militia in Texas at this very time.
    Open resistance would be awful. It terrifies me. I don’t want it. I think, for many reasons, there is little chance that anything good could come of it.
    (For starters, even if you successfully remove one regime, how do you know you’re getting something better in return? Didn’t work out for the French so well…)
    However, I know it is a possibility in my lifetime, & I have decided I will deal with it as that; a possibility that has many bad implications & little hope.
    (Though, yes, look to the Taliban or Vietcong for what this looks like; a lot of suffering & death for all involved)

    • You do not need to join a militia to make a difference. Just be a law abiding, moral, ethical and proactive gun owner and rights supporter. Be politically active and represent the community in a positive way. I think you will do more good that way.

      As to you French Revolution comment –

      The French Revolution was a leftist revolution fought because of greedy and envy.
      The American Revolution was a right-wing revolution fought on principles of morality, liberty and freedom.

      • That “morality” thing is a bugaboo to me. It always brings to mind the strict, severe schoolmarm with the ruler whacking kids on the knuckles for even thinking a “dirty” thought.

        Both wings are evil. Here’s one author’s perspective, which really sounds quite plausible to me, but I’m a nut case and a Radical Libertarian Loon:

        “The spectrum of the Spirit Polarity goes from Lucifer on the extreme left to Ahriman on the extreme right, with your spirit and my loving Light, of course, in the center. Lucifer is warm, earthy, sweet and sexual, and often mean, brutish and demanding. Ahriman is cool, mental, astringent and rational, and quite detached and judgmental.

        While Lucifer is sly, Ahriman is clever, and they both hate Free Will, but for different reasons. In a face to face battle, Ahriman will always outwit Lucifer, and yet Lucifer will sometimes win with sheer force of ill intent and ‘dirty tricks’.”

        If it’s true that quality of life is inversely proportional to amount of government, Q = k / G, isn’t it only logical for the graph to have a point where amount of government equals zero? What’s the value of Q, quality of life, at that point? 😉

        There’s your scientific basis for the assertion that the best government is a nonexistent government.. %-}

      • <>

        Well, there was that pesky part about people starving while the aristocracy lived in luxury. I’ll bet that you hate the idea of a black President playing golf and taking 1/3rd the vacations of the previous President, don’t you?


        The right wingers (conservatives) wanted to stay with England and maintain the status quo. The radicals wanted an independent America that kept its own taxes to itself. Pretty much a liberal concept.

  11. I guess the media and blue blooded slaves will sleep easy knowing that innocent law abiding citizens are killed in their homes by illegal gun toting thugs, instead of the reverse situation.

  12. I tend to be one of those it’ll never happen people. I just think so many people have way way too much to loose still.

    I think you could almost say that we’ll never need the 2A as long as we have the 2A.

    I’m fairly new to the RKBA stuff though and almost never not optimistic about anything.

    • “I think you could almost say that we’ll never need the 2A as long as we have the 2A. ”

      … never need the 2A as long as we have people to exercise the 2A.

      FIFY. 🙂

    • <>

      This. The average home-owning wage slave gun owner has too much to lose. If anyone revolts it will be the struggling poorer classes – those that conservatives look down on – that feel they have nothing to lose.

  13. Having said this I would also say, I will never experience a home invasion but I still have a loaded firearm for it.

  14. I think we would win the war shortly after the first shot was fired. We have something worth fighting for, and all we want to do is be left alone. You think California or New York is going to whip up a bunch of atheist vegetarians into a frenzy, convince them to take up the gun, and attack Texas or Virginia? Please.

    Once the food stamps stop, those states are going to be torn apart by their own residents looting LA or NYC. Their national guard units will be too busy shooting at their own residents to bother with anything outside their borders.

    Now that I think about it, that could be a good thing. It’d thin the liberal herd out….

    • From time to time I have read comments here putting down Atheists. You do yourself a disservice by trying to marginalize that group and others who you perceive not to support the rights of Americans. From my perspective you are no better than the tyrants who wish to destroy our freedoms.

      I once took an oath to defend those freedoms you exercise. As an Atheist I would still honor that oath today. That includes defending your religious freedom to the death. There is no need to create enemies from people that would support you.

      I think it’s time for people that believe guns owners only look one way or believe only certain things to take a look around. This group of ours is not made by a cookie cutter. If we keep dividing ourself based on religious and political ideology, we will hang ourselves with our own 550 cord.

      • ^ Ding ding ding. That’s why legislating morality is a fruitless endeavor… by both sides of the aisle.

      • Please don’t be offended, as I am an atheist myself. I was just trying to stereotype without getting too nit-picky (Birkenstocks are comfortable summer sandals).

        What I meant was that the other side of the country doesn’t believe in ANYTHING, and certainly not anything worth fighting for.

        • Point taken.

          ” What I meant was that the other side of the country doesn’t believe in ANYTHING, and certainly not anything worth fighting for. ”

          So very true.

      • I’ve read and heard some atheists and some scientists be as rigid and dogmatic as any thumper. Personally, it’s obvious to me that the Universe is big enough for all of them to exist, so there must be a lot more to the whole picture than any one of their little dominions encompasses.

        As for me, I guess I’m a Neodruid. I’m grateful to Mother Earth for sustaining me, And glad to breathe the Breath of Life, but Freedom is my Worship Word.

    • <>

      They would hire a bunch of Mexican, Eastern Euro, and Asian mercenaries, mixed in with Americans whose unemployment benefits have run out, and overwhelm the handful of gun-toting WASPs that would actually turn out.

      Take a look at all the T-bagger protests in Washington this year. The organizers expected an overwhelming turnout and have been lucky to draw 50 people.

  15. I said that if the IRS abuses weren’t enough to wake the nation up, I didn’t know what would. But watch what is happening with peoples’ reactions to Obamacare. You want a sea change, this may very well be it. Look to 2014 and 2016. What happens in these elections should be very telling.

    I am now more optimistic than I have been in years that the country can be saved by peaceful means. I still have some uncertainty about how the leftists will react. They are so full of anger and hate, and I am honestly unsure what they will do when they realize they are losing their hold. Regardless, my guess is that political activism and ridicule will probably be the most effective weapons in the near future.

    I would dearly love to see some of these a-holes go to prison for what they have done, but I would gladly give up that pleasure if they would just step down without a fuss.

  16. Here’s my prediction:

    A long, drawn-out, bloody civil war is coming to America.

    There is one group of people who want to totally disarm another group of people in this nation and that group who is armed do not want to be disarmed. That will tear us apart. One group wants “A” another group wants “The-Total-Opposite-of-A”. We cannot have two diametrically opposed groups at the same time. One group is going to lose.

    It will not just be on TV, like with Iraq and Afghanistan are today, but it will be outside our windows, on our streets in our cities and towns that we call home.

    People will hear the screams of the wounded, and the dying outside their homes as they try to put their young children to sleep.

    The body parts, as well as the dead, will pile up in our city parks with no where to put them.

    Our children will hear the sounds of gunfire, artillery, and the sounds of hellfire missiles from their playgrounds and their classrooms. They will learn of the carnage of war with their own eyes.

    With any luck, many years from now, I’ll be able to look at my grandchildren (I’m a 20-something guy) and I’ll be able to say that I was totally wrong in my predictions.